We hope to conduct the business with the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade within half an hour. I will ask him to make his presentation and I ask for questions from members to be as succinct as possible. I welcome the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Eamon Gilmore.
Priorities for European Union Affairs: Discussion with Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade
I thank the Chairman and members of the committee for inviting me to discuss my priorities for European Union affairs for the years ahead. I express my regret that I was unable to attend last Thursday as I had originally planned but I look forward to working with the committee at future meetings.
I congratulate the Chairman on the establishment of the committee and welcome his appointment as chairperson. He will play a valuable role in the examination of the Government's conduct of EU business and through the inputs he will make to consideration of wider developments within the European Union. The European Union is central to our economic recovery and, more broadly, to Ireland's advancing of its interests in the world. I am delighted to have this opportunity to outline my approach to European affairs and to highlight some of the priorities on our agenda.
The programme for Government signalled a number of initiatives, designed to broaden and deepen the Oireachtas's engagement with and scrutiny of EU affairs. I am pleased that many of these have been already introduced or are in the process of being implemented.
As is stated in the programme for Government, we believe the Oireachtas must be in a position to adequately scrutinise proposed EU legislation, to consider how such legislation should be transposed and generally to ensure that Oireachtas views are taken into account in preparation for Council meetings. This is in the spirit of the Lisbon treaty which, as members know, has specific provision for the strengthening of the role of national parliaments. This was one of the elements in the treaty to enhance the democratic legitimacy of the Union.
The new committee arrangements introduced by the Government should ensure an earlier and better engagement by the Oireachtas in EU affairs generally. I know that most of my ministerial colleagues have already met their respective sectoral committees to outline the priority issues in their policy areas. Delivering on the commitment given in the programme for Government, the Taoiseach now briefs the House before, as well as after, European Council meetings. As is spelled out in the programme for Government, Ministers will appear before their respective committees or before this committee in the run-up to meetings of the Council where decisions are made.
Since I have referred to the Lisbon treaty, I might recall here that it was agreed in 2009 that, at the time of the conclusion of the next accession treaty, a protocol on the concerns of the Irish people on the Lisbon treaty would be attached to the treaties. Now that the accession negotiations with Croatia have been formally concluded, the Government is taking the necessary procedural and legal steps to move forward this process. This is with a view to the signature and entry into force of the protocol taking place at the same time as the signature and entry into force of the Croatian accession treaty.
My Department does not process any large amount of EU legislation but we have some work ahead of us in preparing a Bill to amend the European Communities Act. The purpose of this is to permit Ireland to approve the treaty change allowing for the creation of the European stability mechanism. This committee obviously has an interest in this matter and I will welcome, in due course, its contribution to the process.
As members know, the Government is explicitly committed to restoring Ireland's standing as a respected and influential member of the European Union. We are making full use of all Council meetings to build up contacts. In addition, I am continuing a schedule of bilateral meetings with counterparts from member states and EU institutions, as is my colleague the Minister of State, Deputy Lucinda Creighton.
Since taking office I have visited London and Paris. For example, this month I have visited Vilnius and Berlin for consultations with my Lithuanian and German colleagues. These contacts will be complemented by regular engagement at senior level with the European institutions. I was particularly glad to have the opportunity to have discussions with the President of the European Parliament, Jerzy Buzek, during his visit to Ireland last week. I know he also met this committee while he was here.
The Lisbon treaty has clearly enhanced Parliament's standing in the institutional landscape and as a member state and a future Presidency, we want a co-operative and productive relationship. The Government is also committed to stronger co-ordination and strategic direction of Ireland's engagement with the EU across the whole of Government. For that reason, we announced last week our decision to create a unified EU division in the Department of the Taoiseach, including personnel from the EU affairs division of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. This will be headed by a newly appointed Secretary General, Geraldine Byrne-Nason, currently our Deputy Permanent Representative to the EU in Brussels. In addition to her responsibilities for the economic management council and the Tánaiste's office, she will have responsibility for the management of an integrated EU co-ordination function, engaging with other Departments as appropriate, reporting to the Taoiseach and I in respect of our responsibilities at European level. This move responds to the evolution of EU institutional arrangements and practices following the entry into force of the Lisbon treaty, in particular the increased role of the European Council. It should streamline activity on the EU and strengthen the effectiveness of strategic direction.
Since coming into office, the European agenda has been dominated by the continuing economic and financial crisis in the euro area. Members of this committee will be aware that the Taoiseach is in Brussels today for an extraordinary meeting of the Heads of State and Government of the euro area. It is at last becoming clear to all that, as the IMF deputy director said in Dublin last week, "what's lacking so far is a European solution... to a shared European problem." Today our Heads of State and Government are trying to reach that European solution.
Work has been going on for some time to craft a credible programme, including for Greece, one that avoids contagion and spill-over risks and puts the atmosphere of crisis behind us. The proposals put forward at last week's euro group meeting were particularly welcome. These included enhancing the flexibility and the scope of the EFSF, lengthening the maturities of the loans and lowering the interest rates on them. These proposals were, and are as we speak, being analysed, elaborated and negotiated and will feed into the summit meeting in Brussels later today.
Presidents Merkel and Sarkozy met in Berlin last night and senior officials of all the euro area countries are meeting now in Brussels. Private sector involvement - burden sharing - for the second Greek assistance package is one focus, enhancing the flexibility of the EFSF loans is another. All of these are being considered in terms of the effect on the entire euro area, not just on Greece or the others in assistance programmes. It is clear that the kind of Europe-wide solutions being discussed would have a particular benefit to Ireland, in terms of interest rates, maturities and other flexibility in the EFSF which would facilitate our return to accessing normal financing on the international bond markets.
It would be rash to speculate now on the outcome in any detail. There is no doubt that today's meeting in Brussels comes at a crucial time. President Barroso said yesterday that it was time for all the leaders of the Union to show responsibility. Ireland is playing its part in finding a solution to our shared difficulties; others will also play their part.
We should not under estimate the long-term impact of the other economic and financial measures that have already been put in place by the EU over the past year. We have devised a comprehensive package of measures to co-ordinate economic and fiscal policy and to strengthen our systems of economic governance. These represent a major step forward and will help to underpin the stability of the euro and provide the conditions for sustainable growth for future generations.
The work continues in other areas. Pre-eminent among the items to be deliberated on in the coming year or more is the set of Commission proposals for the multi-annual financial framework for 2014-20. It will have major implications for the future of EU policy in many areas. The scale of these proposals, some €1,025 billion, and their impact on national and EU interests will be significant.
Negotiations will be long, complex and difficult. While we fully accept the need for budgetary prudence in these difficult times, we need a budget that is fit for purpose and allows the Union to deliver, whether on the crucial issue of agriculture and food security for European consumers or in the increasingly important area of research and innovation. The General Affairs Council will have a co-ordinating role on this important dossier.
The enlargement portfolio remains a dynamic one. Following on from the official conclusion of negotiations with Croatia at the end of June, work is continuing on the draft treaty of accession. I would expect to see this ready for signature by the heads of state and government at the European Council in December. Croatia's success has given a boost to the prospects of the other Western Balkans countries. Serbia and Montenegro, in particular, are making good progress and it is possible that these two countries will be in accession negotiations by the time Ireland takes over the rotating presidency.
Iceland's negotiations are moving forward rapidly, given that it already complies with much of the acquis. The difficult chapters on agriculture and fisheries are yet to be addressed, but we would expect to see them opened in October. Iceland has set a target of finalising negotiations by the end of 2012. This is a very ambitious goal and it is more likely that it will fall to our presidency to conclude the negotiations. The interest of the Icelandic people in accession remains to be tested in a referendum once the terms of membership have been spelled out.
Turkey remains in the slow lane. Perhaps, with the elections there behind it, there is an opportunity now to generate new momentum. An initiative on Cyprus, for example, could help to break the log-jam in the accession negotiations.
I mention the eastern partnership summit taking place in Warsaw in September, which will be the showcase event of the Polish presidency. The summit aims to provide a roadmap for the future direction of the EU's relationship with our six neighbours to the east, including the development of a free trade area. This is a major priority of the Polish presidency, understandably given its impressive evolution over the past decade.
On the presidency, I now turn to the area where Ireland can make its most significant impact in the EU arena. In just 18 months' time, on 1 January 2013, Ireland assumes for the seventh time the presidency of the European Union. The date coincides with the 40th anniversary of Ireland's accession to the EU and is a reminder of the economic and social transformation of Ireland brought about by our membership of the Union over the past four decades. While the presidency in 2013 will differ in some ways to previous presidencies following changes introduced by the Lisbon treaty, the importance of the presidency to Ireland and the potential that it has to shape perceptions about Ireland's place in the Union and about the State itself have not changed.
Preparations for 2013 started last year with the establishment of two inter-departmental groups to co-ordinate planning for the presidency. In June I brought a memorandum to Government on Ireland's EU presidency which underlined the importance of the presidency for engaging constructively with the EU agenda and rebuilding Ireland's reputation internationally. The number of meetings and contacts at political level between members of the Cabinet and key contacts and counterparts are increasing as preparations intensify.
Last week when I met Mr. Buzek we discussed the greater role now played by the European Parliament in the EU legislative process since the entry into force of the Lisbon treaty. Ireland enjoys good relations with the European Parliament and we will maintain a close and constructive working relationship with it in advance of, and during the presidency to facilitate the progress of legislation in 2013.
At this stage, it is likely that issues including the financial, economic and employment creation themes currently dominating the EU and euro area agenda and economic competitiveness, will continue to be prominent in 2013. Other major issues that are expected to figure on the Irish presidency agenda include the next multiannual financial framework, the common agriculture policy and common fisheries policy. These are all policy areas of broad importance to Ireland, the EU and member states and we look forward to working closely with partners to progress these issues.
The formal grouping of three presidencies over an 18 month period with an agreed joint programme is also new and Ireland is a member of a trio that includes Lithuania and Greece. I met my Lithuanian counterpart and the Lithuanian Prime Minister recently and look forward to meeting my recently-appointed Greek colleague to discuss our presidency programme.
Ireland's future lies in its membership of the EU and we are determined to ensure that we remain an engaged participant in the EU decision-making process. This Government views the presidency 2013 as an opportunity for us to demonstrate our commitment to playing an active role in the affairs of the Union. The presidency will also make it possible for Ireland to promote policies that affect the lives of all our citizens and to uphold and advance the values on which the European Union is founded and which we share.
Since entering the EU in 1973, Ireland has developed a reputation among partners for running impartial and effective presidencies. We have demonstrated that small member states can run the EU's agenda efficiently. Successfully managing previous presidencies enhanced perceptions about Ireland and its capabilities, and helped to strengthen our image abroad. A well-run and effectively managed presidency in 2013 can, again, contribute to strengthening Ireland's reputation as a credible partner in Europe.
I again thank the Chairman for having invited me to speak to the committee. I will be very happy to respond to any questions members may have.
I thank the Tánaiste for articulating his priorities on the European Union so well and giving us such a clear presentation. I have a couple of points.
One of the areas this committee has been concerned about is the Western Balkans, in particular Kosovo, Bosnia, Serbia and so on. We passed a motion in the Dáil today on the European Union stabilisation and Association agreement. Perhaps the next time the Minister comes before the committee he will say a few words on that. I would like to put it on the agenda because under the former Chairman, Deputy Bernard Durkan, we dwelt to a very considerable degree on that issue. We hope we made some contribution to helping the situation.
On the summit, I welcome the positive remarks of the Minister. It seems there is a sense of solidarity coming to the table at last in the European Council. Can the Minister give any further detail on the specific areas of interest to Ireland, namely a reduction in interest rates and flexibility on the maturity date of loans?
My next point is idiosyncratic to a certain extent. I refer to the statements made by the Minister and the Taoiseach in the Dáil recently on the Cloyne report and our relationship with the Vatican. I ask him to comment on that, in terms of our remit. I ask members to confine themselves to questions rather than comments because of the short time the Tánaiste is with us.
I welcome the Tánaiste and congratulation him, his office and Department for setting out the programme he outlined. It is hugely important at this time. Now and the next five years will be a defining time, not only here but in Europe, in terms of the degree to which the European Union recognises its full potential. We have discussed this on numerous occasions in the past. I congratulate all concerned in arriving at the situation which is now emerging whereby there appears to be a growing unity within the European Union on the manner in which the issues confronting some member states to a greater extent than others, are being tackled. It is hugely important. I ask the Tánaiste to emphasise this from here on. It was part and parcel of the Lisbon treaty that there would be unity of concept and of approach on the part of member states. The Tánaiste and the Taoiseach emphasised that in the past week. Rather than each state making a unilateral effort to solve every other state's problem, at least there appears to be some kind of unity now. Such an approach has been much sought after, but very difficult to achieve.
I would like to ask some questions. Can particular attention be paid to ensuring there is a stronger role for national parliaments? Of course it is a contradiction. If national parliaments have a stronger role, they are more in conflict with the European Union. To what extent can national parliamentarians engage with their colleagues with a view to achieving some kind of common purpose? That has been most lacking in national parliaments in recent years, particularly during a time of crisis. Would it be possible to achieve unity of purpose in the face of crises in the next five years? I know it is intended to do so. It would be hugely beneficial if it could be achieved. The ability to function of any organisation faces its acid test when a crisis arrives. I know the answer to the question, but I want the Tánaiste to confirm the intention in this regard.
In recent years, the member states of the EU have been treated in a rather shabby fashion internationally. Of course we made mistakes. Of course mistakes that should not have been made were made here. The job of various Europe-wide institutions like the ECB - if they were functioning properly - should have been to trigger mechanisms and send signals to alert everybody to the fact that things were not going right. I hope a means can be found of ensuring we never again have a crisis like the economic crisis we have had across Europe. It makes no difference if the crisis is triggered off by one or more small or large countries. We have the ability to put in place structures to ensure we have a safety harness that suits and meets the requirements of everybody.
I know the Tánaiste is pressed for time, so I will keep my comments and questions brief. He mentioned that his Department is "preparing a Bill to amend the European Communities Act ... to approve the ... creation of the European stability mechanism". As part of this committee's work programme, the possibility of compiling a report on the stability mechanism is being considered. I ask the Tánaiste to consult this committee when the changes he mentioned are being drafted. We would like to be involved in the process of drawing them up, rather than merely being asked to look at them after the legislation has been drafted.
The Tánaiste mentioned that he has presented a memorandum on Ireland's Presidency of the EU to the Government. Would it be possible for that document to be made available to the members of this committee? Obviously, we would treat it with confidentiality. Has the Tánaiste considered any of the priorities for Ireland's Presidency? Does he have any figurehead or bannerhead issues he would like to put on the agenda?
I would like to conclude by asking the Tánaiste about the diplomatic initiative. He might not be wearing his European affairs hat when I ask this question. Traditionally, we do not have strong links with countries like Brazil, Russia, India and China. There is no traditional Irish diaspora in those areas. During the diplomatic initiative, has the Tánaiste used his colleagues in the EU to try to strengthen Ireland's links with those countries for trade purposes? Countries like Spain and Portugal have stronger links with the countries in question.
I welcome the Tánaiste. This is the first opportunity we have had at this forum to discuss with him his agenda for the coming years. I will pick up on the Chairman's point about the south east Balkans. I would like this committee to be able to discuss the Israeli situation with the Tánaiste on an ongoing basis. I know it is probably discussed regularly at the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade. This committee has had an active involvement in that issue in previous years, particularly in light of the existence of the neighbourhood agreement between the EU and Israel. Perhaps we can include that on the agenda for discussion. I will not detain the Tánaiste further because I know he has a rather tight schedule.
I thank the Tánaiste for his opening statement to the committee. He will have a critically important role to play during Ireland's Presidency of the EU, particularly in light of this country's strategic interest in the Common Agricultural Policy and Common Fisheries Policy. The diplomatic initiative, which was spearheaded by the Tánaiste, will serve the country well in that regard. What resources do we have in the context of the initiative, relative to other countries of comparable size such as Denmark?
It seems that good work may emerge from Brussels today. I do not believe we would be in such a position without the diplomatic initiative that has been spearheaded by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. What are the Tánaiste's plans for continuing the good work with regard to that initiative? We are keeping our hopes high and our expectations low. The initiative can be regarded as the cornerstone of any good work that will emerge from Brussels today. Relative to our size as a country, what resources do we have to continue the good work that has been engineered by the Department?
Obviously, we welcome the fact that Ireland will play a critical role in 2013, in relation to the conclusion of the Presidency. The diplomatic initiative will be significant. We need to continue our good work in that regard.
I welcome the Tánaiste and congratulate him on his highly successful work that has helped to ensure a Europe-wide solution is firmly and centrally on the agenda at today's meeting. We hope it is successful on a number of levels. I echo the Chairman's request to the Tánaiste to expand on his thoughts on the meeting. How does he think it will go? We will know soon enough. We hope it will go well and we will continue after it.
The lack of regulation of this country's banking sector is legendary. It goes without saying that it was horrendously inept and incompetent. Obviously, there was a lack of regulation at European level as well. I ask the Tánaiste to elaborate on what he said about new governance. Is he happy that sufficient controls are in place now? Is he happy that there is a desire to implement them? Does there continue to be room for improvement in that regard?
It was heartening to be told at a previous meeting that the budget for the Common Agricultural Policy is not diminishing significantly. That in itself is good. Are we building up a system of alliances with countries with similar concerns about the Common Agricultural Policy, with a view to advancing our case as the policy is renegotiated? We have a specific interest in dairy and beef. The Tánaiste knows about that. I am interested in this matter.
One of the objectives cited by the troika and in EU policy is the ending of restrictive practices. That will necessitate internal competition and competition in professions like the legal and medical professions. There is a great absence of internal competition. There are many restrictive practices here. I would like the Tánaiste to comment on what is happening at EU level and domestically in that regard.
I have heard that the less favoured areas are being reviewed at Commission level. That might be to Ireland's detriment as the Union expands to the south. The Tánaiste might like to comment on that.
I would like to conclude by raising a matter that was alluded to by Deputy Dooley. I would be interested to hear the Tánaiste's comments on the attack on the French ship that was destined to go to Israel the other day. I have received direct representations on this matter, which concerns us all. I do not know the extent of our information on the attack. I ask the Tánaiste to comment on the whole situation around the flotilla and specifically on the French ship.
The leaders of the EU member states meet today. Not for the first time, the real meeting took place a day in advance. It seems like the Germans and French make the decisions and people turn up today to hear the answers. Does the Tánaiste feel that countries on the periphery like Ireland are being marginalised?
I agree with some of the speakers regarding the CAP. I welcome the comments of the Tánaiste and the Minister of State before him. The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food also gave a positive view from his dealings with the EU. Food security was a cornerstone of the original EEC treaties. Is there a now a recognition that the EU has a role in feeding the world? There were economic reasons to food security, but there are also moral reasons.
The Tánaiste stated that Turkey remains in the slow lane in respect of accession. Are there concerns with immigration, given the size of the country? What is the Tánaiste's view and Europe's view about such a large country joining the community?
The Tánaiste knows my general views on this. We have had exchanges on the issue in the Dáil during priority questions, so I will cut to the chase. It is fairly well understood in Europe that there will be an agreement on a cut to interest rates and that there will be an extension of time on the repayments. That is being forced by the folly and the lack of leadership at European level which has pushed Greece to the edge of the abyss and which has impacted on Italy and Spain. Due to that new crisis and because of international pressure - with President Obama ringing Chancellor Merkel - it is clear that momentum is gathering for a solution on the issue. The difficulty for Ireland is that this is only half the problem. The bottom line is that the debt sustainability issue for Ireland has not been addressed. Is our Taoiseach putting that issue front and centre? Our European partners have already made about €10 billion in profit from interest, but interest rates are not the core issue. The issue is debt sustainability for Ireland. What is our strategy on this?
In terms of the European stability mechanism, respected voices in Ireland are stating clearly that it is unconstitutional to make the relevant amendments to the Lisbon treaty without giving the Irish people a chance to have a say on it. Our Government has decided to proceed and it has clearly received legal advice. I again ask the Tánaiste to publish the legal advice received from the Attorney General, which has led the Government to decide not to put the European stability mechanism to a referendum.
The Tánaiste said Ireland would lead the charge at European level in respect of Palestine and recognition of the Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly later this year. What happened at the meeting last Monday? Did the Tánaiste lead the charge? Has Europe now agreed to support that and to engage with the US in respect of recognising the Palestinian state?
There are many questions for you, Tánaiste.
There are. The stabilisation association agreement with Serbia was considered by the foreign affairs committee yesterday and was approved by the Dáil this morning. I am quite happy to discuss the issue with this committee at some stage in the future, as well as accession issues in respect of Serbia or the other Balkan states. I acknowledge the work done by the previous European affairs committee on the western Balkans.
Several questions were asked about today's summit. The meeting is taking place today and we cannot anticipate the eventual outcome, but a couple of things are important. It is important that the meeting is taking place today. When Ireland went into the programme with the EU, the ECB and the IMF last November, we were told at the time that it could not be renegotiated and that it applied to this country alone, while there were separate programmes for Greece and Portugal. Since then, a couple of things have significantly shifted. First, the programmes are being significantly renegotiated through this process. Second, we are no longer talking about problems affecting peripheral countries, but about reaching a more comprehensive and far-reaching European solution. If we go back four or five months, all the commentary was about what would happen to Greece, Ireland and Portugal. The acknowledgment that there was a European problem at all was very thin on the ground. Now it has been acknowledged that there is a European problem that must be addressed comprehensively at Europe level. The first achievement has been that we have moved the location of the discussion to central Europe.
The issues being considered as part of that discussion are the interest rate, the duration of the maturity of loans, the flexibility within the EFSF mechanism and how that might be used more creatively to address some of the problems that exist generally in the eurozone and in the programme countries. I hope there will be a positive outcome for the euro, for Europe and for this country from those discussions today.
All of this has been the product of a period of work and co-ordination by the Government. We have approached our economic difficulties in a much more joined-up way, through the economic management council that has been established at the heart of the Government, and by arriving where we are at today, given that the discussions are taking place. The real meeting is the meeting taking place today, but in the lead up to that meeting, there have been many bilateral meetings, and not just between France and Germany. The Government's approach at the beginning was to undertake a diplomatic initiative, when we said we would get out there and talk with the other states and institutions, and work on this until we get an outcome that is satisfactory for Ireland and Europe. Much of this has gone on under the radar over the past four to five months, although some of it has been in the public domain, with bilateral meetings between Ministers and so on. Much of the work has been done by officials in my Department, including those who work in our missions in the 26 other member states. They have done a great amount of work over that period, as have the people in the European Union division of my Department, and I pay tribute to them. They did work, for example, in recalling our ambassadors to get a more co-ordinated response and hear things from the horse's mouth as to the Government's objectives. We had briefings on several occasions for the ambassadors from other EU states. All of that had the objective of moving the debate to a European context and achieving an outcome.
Deputy Mac Lochlainn mentioned the intervention of President Obama. There is no secret that the Taoiseach and I talked to him when he was here about the programme, the efforts and approach we were taking and the co-operation we sought from other European Union states. I am very glad he took a very active interest in it, as did the UK Government which has been particularly helpful in some of the work we did.
The Queen's visit involved many public appearances and events but parallel work took place during that with the Foreign Secretary Mr. William Hague. He was here during the four-day visit and we had many discussions with him. The Prime Minister, Mr. David Cameron, was here and the Taoiseach and I had discussions with him as well. That work has been going on for a long period. It has resulted in us being at a point where there is a summit meeting with a European agenda and I hope it will produce the desired result.
Several other points were mentioned. I will not take them in order. On relations with the Vatican, the Taoiseach spoke for the Government yesterday. Members of the committee will be aware that I called in the papal nuncio, who is the ambassador of the Vatican to Ireland, and communicated to him formally the Cloyne report and the Government response to it. I have asked him to get from his authorities in the Vatican a formal response for the State on what happened and the utterly unacceptable intervention by the Vatican on this matter. When we receive a response we will consider and deal with it.
On the ESM, which was raised by Deputy Mac Lochlainn and Senator Reilly, and European Community legislation, our intention is to deal with the treaty change which allows for its establishment. It was done under Article 48 of the treaty, which is the simplified revision mechanism where the competencies of the European Union are not being changed. The advice of the Attorney General, which was given in a verbal report to the Government, is that a referendum is not necessary. The intention is that the EC Act 1972 will be amended. The Oireachtas will be able to debate it. It will not be a long Bill. When the Government approves the heads of the Bill I will revert to the committee. If there is an opportunity between the approval of its heads and its drafting I will have no difficulty in having a discussion with the committee.
Senator Reilly also asked about extending the diplomatic initiative to BRIC countries. The diplomatic initiative, as it was called, was about doing the diplomatic work that would get us to our current point. It has been successful. It was about and within Europe. There is potential for the European external action service to play a bigger role. I have discussed the matter with Catherine Ashton, in terms of the way in which the action service is being developed. It is early days but there are areas where it could operate, particularly in countries where we do not have representation.
On Deputy Keaveney's point, one of the things which is not well known is that we achieve and do a great deal with very few resources. There are 76 missions abroad. Denmark has approximately 140. Finland, which we can be compared with in terms of population, has a total diplomatic staff of about 800. We have a total diplomatic staff of approximately 340. I pay tribute to the staff who are doing a huge amount of work in circumstances where the resources available to them are limited. For example, seven of our missions are one-person missions, a number of which are in Europe. It is important that we put this into context. The work across the 26 other member states which we had to do over the past four or five months to restore the country's reputation and which we will have to do in the lead-in to the presidency is hugely challenging and done by very small numbers of people. That is something we need to understand.
We discussed the issue of Israel and Palestine at the foreign affairs Council last Monday. The phrase "Leading the charge" was not mine.
The Minister agreed to it though.
Somebody else used it. Perhaps it was Deputy Mac Lochlainn.
I invited the Minister to agree with it.
I will have to pay more attention to the invitations the Deputy gives across the floor. He should not put words in my mouth. It is not how I would describe it.
We agreed last Monday that the High Representative Ms Catherine Ashton would be given a very strong mandate from the Foreign Affairs Council to engage in talks with the Israeli and Palestinian sides. It was unanimously agreed. She has also been involved in the quartet which met at a political level in Washington the previous week and discussed the possibilities of getting political negotiations restarted. No statement was issued and it was indicated that the work was continuing, including sending a US team to Israel and Palestine to talk again to both sides. We had hoped there would be better progress made at the quartet.
We are obviously in circumstances now where, in the run in to the American election season, it is less likely that many initiatives will be taken at US level. Therefore, the European Union has a more central role to play in attempting to get things moving. Ms Catherine Ashton was given the approval, authority and mandate to do that last week.
Senator Reilly asked several questions. On the budget and the multiannual financial framework, we are at an early stage in our discussions. The Commission has published it, the Government has given it initial consideration and individual Departments will now respond to the proposals. Under the Polish presidency it is proposed that there will be clarification and general responses to the proposals. It is intended that under the Danish presidency significant discussions and negotiations would take place on the multiannual financial framework.
It should be concluded under the Cypriot presidency but it may not be for many reasons. It may be the case that the conclusion of the budget will fall to our presidency at the beginning of 2013. A number of issues have to be considered. One is the question of the size of the budget. There are member states who want a smaller budget. Various components make up the budget. There are issues and proposals for revenue raising and so on, and these will be discussed. Have I left anything out?
The Minister's reply is comprehensive.
I asked about Turkey.
There has been slow progress with regard to Turkey's membership of the European Union. I do not see any immediate prospects of this process being speeded up. There is some expectation of a move following the Turkish elections. Ireland is positively disposed towards enlargement of the EU, including an enlargement to include Turkey. It would not be the first time the European Union has been enlarged by including a state with a big population. I reiterate that things are moving very slowly in this regard. Cyprus is an issue that comes into this mix. Also, a great many issues will need to be addressed during the accession discussions when that stage is reached. I suggest that at some point we might have a discussion about the state of play regarding the accession of different countries because this matter was also raised in the context of Serbia and the western Balkans.
Thank you, Tánaiste. I am sure you will be back before the committee in the autumn. Thank you for explaining the priorities of your Department and we will bear these in mind when organising the committee's work programme. This has been a very valuable and useful exchange of ideas. Thank you for your comprehensive contribution.